Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/171/2018

R.Kanthraj S/o Ramappa - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Section Officer,BESCOM - Opp.Party(s)

Sri.P.S. Sathyanarayana Rao

18 Jan 2019

ORDER

 

COMPLAINT FILED ON:14/09/2018

DISPOSED      ON:18/01/2019

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA.

 

 

C.C.NO:171/2018

 

DATED: 18^th JANUARY 2019

 

PRESENT: - SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH  : PRESIDENT                          B.A., LL.B.,

SMT. JYOTHI RADHESH JEMBAGI

BSc.,MBA., DHA.,             : LADY MEMBER

 

 

……COMPLAINANT/S	R.Kanthraj S/o Ramappa, Major, Proprietor, Sri Sai Petroleum Service Station, Indian oil corporation Ltd., Near Sarvodaya Bed College, Pavagoda road, Parshurampura Village& Hobli, Challkere Taluk, Chitradurga District   (Reptd., By Sri.P.S. Sathyanarayana Rao, Advocate)
V/S
…..OPPOSITE PARTIES	1. The Section Officer, BESCOM, Parshurampura Village, Challkere Taluk.   2. The Executive Engineer, O & M Sub-Division, BESCOM, Hiriyuru.   3. The Assistant Engineer, O & M Sub-Division, BESCOM, Rural Subdivision, Challkere.   (Reptd., By Sri.T.K. Chandrashekara Rao, Advocate)

ORDER

SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH:   PRESIDENT

The above complaint has been filed by the complainant u/Sec.12 of the C.P Act, 1986 for the relief to direct the OPs to modify the orders while giving sanction to run the Petrol Bunk, to pay Rs.20,000/- towards mental agony, Rs.5,000/- towards costs and such other reliefs.

2.      The brief facts of the case of the above complainant is that, complainant is a consumer of BESCOM having RR No.CKPP1935 for his petrol Bunk situated at Parashurampura village, Challakere Taluk, Chitradurga District.  Complainant applied for sanction of power supply for 10 HP to run the Petrol Bunk on 10.10.2014 and the OPs have sanctioned and entered into an agreement on 18.08.2014 for supply of 10 HP / LT 5 Transmission.  After lapse of four years, the OP No.1 has given notice on 21.05.2018 to the complainant saying that, the Petrol Bunk is coming under LT-3 but not LT-5 directing the complainant to pay Rs.1,32,046/-.  OPs have kept quiet for four years and now they have demanded to pay the balance of current bill, which is a deficiency of service, dereliction of duties and unfair trade practice, because at the time of applying for power connection, the complainant clearly shown that power connection required is for Petrol Bunk and likewise the OPs have sanctioned the power.  Complainant has regularly paid the bill amount to the OPs without fail.  Therefore the notice issued by the OPs is not maintainable under law.  The complainant has replied to the notice dated 11.06.2018 stating that, the OPs have approved the agreement and the complainant has paid the bill amount regularly without fail.  It is further submitted that, once the agreement has been entered into between the parties, it cannot be altered or modified under the law.  The complainant has invested huge amount to run the Petrol Bunk by observing all the requisite formalities.  The complainant at any point of time, has not misused the Tariff of BESCOM.  Therefore, it has to be corrected by the OPs pertains to power supply to the Petrol Bunk of complainant.  The cause of action arose for this complaint when the complainant has complied the notice dated 11.06.2018 issued by the OPs, which is within the jurisdiction of this Forum and the OPs have failed to take suitable action and therefore, prayed for allow the complaint.    

3.      After service of notice, OPs appeared through Sri. T.K. Chandrashekara Rao, Advocate and filed version.  According to the version filed by OPs that, the complainant is a consumer of BESCOM having RR No.CKPP935 for his petrol Bunk situated at Parashurampura village, Challakere Taluk, Chitradurga District.  Complainant applied for power supply of 10 HP for running the petrol bunk on 10.10.2014 is also admitted.  It is also admitted that, the OPs have entered into an agreement with the complainant on 18.08.2014 for supply of 10 HP power.  It is submitted that, the OPs have sanctioned power supply under LT-5 tariff.  It is admitted that, on 21.05.2018 on inspection of AEE (Ele), BESCOM LT rating Hiriyur inspected the petrol bunk of complainant and found that, the petrol bunk is coming under LT-3 commercial, but not LT-5 and directed the complainant to pay Rs.1,32,046/-, is admitted.  It is submitted that, on 09.09.2015 at the time of service of electricity to the complainant, CKPP 1935 the tariff LT-5 was fixed by oversight, actually the installation RR No.CKPP 1935 has to be billed under LT-3 tariff commercial, the same was noticed on 05.05.2018 on inspection by AEE (Ele) BESCOM LT rating, Hiriyur.  Therefore, the back billing was for Rs.1,32,046/- and the notice was issued to pay the said amount of short claim.  The OPs have put to financial loss by applying lower tariff LT-5 instead of LT-3 to the complainant, the same was a bonafide mistake and the same was not a deficiency of service and dereliction of duties.  It is submitted that, on representation of the complainant, the short claim of Rs.1,32,046/- has been reduced to Rs.30,137/-, but the complainant has failed to pay the reduced short claim of Rs.30,137/- till today.  As per the sanction letter of BESCOM vide No.6816-17 dated 10.11.2014 as per class-4 of the sanction letter and also as per class-5 of agreement the complainant shall and bound to pay the tariff charges applicable to the installation from time to time, the power supply sanctioned to the complainant for RR No.CKPP 1935 is effective from 01.04.2015 under LT-3 commercial tariff and the prayer of the complainant to apply prevailed present tariff of LT-5 is illegal and without authority of law.  Therefore, the complainant cannot get the benefit of bonafide mistake and human error of the OPs.  It is submitted that, as on the date of service on 09.09.2015, the tariff applicable to Petrol Bunk was LT-3 commercial, therefore, the complainant is liable to pay the electric bill as per LT-3 commercial tariff.  It is submitted that, the consumer has utilized the power for Petrol Bunk from 09.09.2015 to 09.04.2018 and onwards.  The OPs have claimed only difference of charges from LT-3 to LT-5 tariff and no penal charges or extra charges included in the revised bill of Rs.30,137/-, the same has to be paid by the complainant under LT-3 as agreed by the complainant.  Therefore, there is no deficiency of service on the part of OPs and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.         

4.      The complainant has examined as PW-1 by filing affidavit evidence and the documents Ex.A-1 to A-7 were got marked and closed their side.  On behalf of OPs, one Sri.E. Shivakumar, the Section Officer has examined as DW-1 relied on Ex.B-1 to B-10 documents have been got marked and closed their side.   

5.      Arguments heard.

6.      Now the points that arise for our consideration for decision of above complaints are that;

 

1. Whether the complainants prove that, the OPs have committed deficiency of service by giving back billing under LT-5 instead of LT-5 and entitled for the relief as prayed for?

              (2) What order?

          7.      Our findings on the above points are as follows:-

                    Point No.1:- Partly in affirmative.

                    Point No.2:- As per final order.

REASONS

8.      Point No.1:- It is not in dispute that, the complainant is having electric connection from the BESCOM authority under RR No.CKPP 1935 for his petrol bunk at Parashurampura village, Challakere Taluk, Chitradurga District. On 10.10.2014.  The OPs have entered into an agreement with the complainant on 18.08.2014 for supply of 10 HP/LT-5 Transmission.  After lapse of four years, the OP No.1 has given notice on 21.05.2018 to the complainant saying that, the Petrol Bunk is coming under LT-3 but not LT-5 directing the complainant to pay Rs.1,32,046/-.  After that the complainant has given requisition to the OPs to clarify whether the OPs have sanctioned LT-3 or LT-5.  The OPs have verified and informed the complainant that, he has taken LT-3 connection but not LT-5.  By oversight, the OPs have issued letter to the complainant stating that, the complainant has taken LT-5 connection.  The advocate for complainant has argued that, the complainant has obtained 10 HP connection under LT-5 but not LT-3.  After lapse of four years, the OPs have issued notice to the complainant directing the complainant to pay Rs.1,32,046/-, it is purely a negligence on the part of OPs.  But actually, the complainant is having LT-5 connection and not LT-3.  Advocate for OPs have addressed the arguments and submitted that, no doubt the complainant has obtained 10 HP connection from the OPs to run the Petrol Bunk with LT-3, but the officers of the OPs by oversight it was mentioned in the documents as LT-5 that advantage cannot be taken by the complainant.  The OPs have issued notice to the complainant to pay a sum of Rs.1,32,046/-.  After that, the complainant had given requisition to the OPs to reconsider the back billing charge imposed to the complainant.  After that the OPs have to reconsider the requisition made by the complainant and finally, the OPs have informed the complainant to pay a sum of Rs.30,137/-, it is reasonable amount has to be paid by the complainant. 

9.      We have gone through the entire documents filed by the complainant and OPs.  There is no dispute between both the parties that, the complainant is the consumer of BESCOM having RR No.CKPP 1935 to his Petrol Bunk situated at Parashurampura village, Challakere Taluk.  The OPs have sanctioned power supply of 10 HP to run the Petrol Bunk to the complainant on 10.10.2014.  Accordingly after conducting inspection and on verification by the OPs, the agreement has been entered into with the complainant on 18.08.2014 for supply of 10 HP/LT-5 transmission.  The AEE (Ele.) Hiriyur has inspected the spot of the complainant and verified that, the complainant’s petrol bunk has obtained LT-3 and not LT-5 connection.  Accordingly, the complainant is still due to pay a sum of Rs.1,32,046/-.  After the requisition made by the complainant, they have issued notice to pay a sum of Rs.1,32,046/- towards back billing charges.  After receiving the notice, the complainant has given requisition to the OPs to reconsider the back billing charges.  After the requisition made by the complainant, the OPs have given notice to the complainant to pay a sum of Rs.30,137/-, but that amount also has not been paid by the complainant, it is not correct , the same is to be paid by the complainant.  Hence, the OPs have not committed any deficiency of service to the complainant.  The only mistake as committed by the OPs is that, they have given notice to the complainant again and again claiming the amount from the complainant for the same reason, it is not correct.  On this point only, the OPs have committed deficiency of service.  Accordingly, this Point No.1 is held as partly affirmative to the complainant.    

  10.     Point No.2:- As discussed on the above point and for the reasons stated therein we pass the following:-

ORDER

The complaint filed by the complainant U/s 12 of CP Act 1986 is partly allowed.

It is ordered that, the OPs are hereby directed not claim any back billing charges from the complainant by receiving an amount of Rs.30,137/- from the complainant.

It is further ordered that, the OPs are hereby directed to pay Rs.5,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards costs of this proceeding.  

It is further ordered that, the OPs are hereby directed to comply the above order within 30 days from the date of this order.

 (This order is made with the consent of Member after the correction of the draft on 18/01/2019 and it is pronounced in the open Court after our signatures)         

 

                                     

MEMBER                                                   PRESIDENT

-:ANNEXURES:-

Witnesses examined on behalf of Complainant:

 

PW-1:  Complainant by way of affidavit evidence.

 

Witnesses examined on behalf of OPs:

 

DW-1: Sri.E. Shivakumar, Section Officer by way of affidavit evidence.

 

Documents marked on behalf of Complainants:

 

01	Ex-A-1:-	Application for sanction of electricity dated 10.10.2014
02	Ex-A-2:-	Sanction order dated 18.08.2014
03	Ex-A-3:-	Bescom Notice Dated 21.05.2018
04	Ex.A-4:	Objection to the BESCOM dated 06.06.2018
05	Ex.A-5:-	Bescom notice dated 01.08.2018
06	Ex.A-6:-	Legal notice dated 11.06.2018
07	Ex.A-7:-	3 Postal receipts with acknowledgements

 

Documents marked on behalf of OPs:

01	Ex-B-1 & 2:-	Power Sanction order dated 10.11.2014 with conditions
02	Ex-B-3:-	Power supply agreement
03	Ex-B-4:-	Rating report
04	Ex.B-5:	Demand for payment dated 21.05.2018
05	Ex.B-6:-	Objection by the complainant dated 06.06.2018
06	Ex.B-7:-	Letter dated 06.06.2018 to OPs
07	Ex.B-8:-	Letter dated 11.06.2018 to OP No.3 by OP No.1
08	Ex.B-9:-	Revised bill dated 15.06.2018
09	Ex.B-10:-	Electricity Tariff - 2016

 

 

MEMBER                                                   PRESIDENT

Rhr**